Jump to content

Featured Replies

  On 11/08/2021 at 08:45, titan_uranus said:

There is a significant amount of talk in here about bias and conspiracies and favourability etc.

I'd be really interested in as deep an analysis of free kick counts as possible. Why do the Dogs and Eagles, for example, get so many more than their opponents, and why does Richmond concede so many?

The two main times a free kick is awarded are tackles and marking contests. As to tackles, most free kicks go to the player with the ball (holding the man, push in the back, high contact, tripping, dangerous tackle) as the tackler only has one option (holding the ball). Similarly in a marking contest we know that the player in front is going to get free kicks for holds, pushes in the back or high contact a lot more than the player behind.

Is it really that fanciful to wonder whether the Dogs get more free kicks because, for example, they're first to the ball more often than their opponent, and therefore get more free kicks from bad tackles? Or that their key position players hold front position more often and therefore get free kicks more than other clubs?

Similarly with Richmond they've regularly played with aggression in their era of dominance and have pushed the envelope, giving away professional free kicks where needed as well. Is it that surprising then that they concede more frees than they get?

I have no data on any of this but it's a topic that is missing from this thread, which focuses solely on incompetence, bias and corruption.

Is there a statistics page of frees?

ie A breakdown of what the frees were for?

That would be the frst step in analysing it...

 
  On 11/08/2021 at 08:45, titan_uranus said:

There is a significant amount of talk in here about bias and conspiracies and favourability etc.

I'd be really interested in as deep an analysis of free kick counts as possible. Why do the Dogs and Eagles, for example, get so many more than their opponents, and why does Richmond concede so many?

The two main times a free kick is awarded are tackles and marking contests. As to tackles, most free kicks go to the player with the ball (holding the man, push in the back, high contact, tripping, dangerous tackle) as the tackler only has one option (holding the ball). Similarly in a marking contest we know that the player in front is going to get free kicks for holds, pushes in the back or high contact a lot more than the player behind.

Is it really that fanciful to wonder whether the Dogs get more free kicks because, for example, they're first to the ball more often than their opponent, and therefore get more free kicks from bad tackles? Or that their key position players hold front position more often and therefore get free kicks more than other clubs?

Similarly with Richmond they've regularly played with aggression in their era of dominance and have pushed the envelope, giving away professional free kicks where needed as well. Is it that surprising then that they concede more frees than they get?

I have no data on any of this but it's a topic that is missing from this thread, which focuses solely on incompetence, bias and corruption.

I think the fallacy in the reasoning above about the Bulldogs is apparent when the number of possessions is taken into account.

The Bulldogs often have a large differential greatly in their favour, even when the opposition has more possessions.So the man with the ball in the opposition is being penalised. They must be far better tacklers than any other side.

 

  On 11/08/2021 at 08:45, titan_uranus said:

There is a significant amount of talk in here about bias and conspiracies and favourability etc.

I'd be really interested in as deep an analysis of free kick counts as possible. Why do the Dogs and Eagles, for example, get so many more than their opponents, and why does Richmond concede so many?

The two main times a free kick is awarded are tackles and marking contests. As to tackles, most free kicks go to the player with the ball (holding the man, push in the back, high contact, tripping, dangerous tackle) as the tackler only has one option (holding the ball). Similarly in a marking contest we know that the player in front is going to get free kicks for holds, pushes in the back or high contact a lot more than the player behind.

Is it really that fanciful to wonder whether the Dogs get more free kicks because, for example, they're first to the ball more often than their opponent, and therefore get more free kicks from bad tackles? Or that their key position players hold front position more often and therefore get free kicks more than other clubs?

Similarly with Richmond they've regularly played with aggression in their era of dominance and have pushed the envelope, giving away professional free kicks where needed as well. Is it that surprising then that they concede more frees than they get?

I have no data on any of this but it's a topic that is missing from this thread, which focuses solely on incompetence, bias and corruption.

I have been wondering if there is any detailed data on frees, not just across the whole of the competition. I would like to see where/what we win frees for and where/what we give them away for compared to the rest of the teams. I am sure that someone is doing this and that clubs have access to it. I think it would be valuable knowledge to have on a week to week basis so that you know how to counter opposition teams.

Any one know where this data might be?

 

While we're in the hunt for free kick data, I'd be fascinated to see a timeline of them over the course of games.

I'm absolutely sure that much of the differential in our game against West Coast game in a couple of bursts, most notably the alarming one right after the restart.

Would be interesting to see the extent of a relationship between free kick 'momentum' and overall game momentum. Before? After? Side by side?


  On 12/08/2021 at 08:41, Demonland said:

It was the free kick differential after Round 2 which was the first round of the season that Zero Hanger release their Free Kick Differential graphic.

I'm not sure why it disappeared but here it is again.

166542405_1867660023408217_2670941786786

I can’t see the relevance of this “ one-off” stat from round  2. .Is it trying to show the Dogs DONT get a dream run?

Edited by Jumping Jack Clennett
Typo

  • Author
  On 12/08/2021 at 10:12, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

I can’t see the relevance of this “ one-off” stat from round  2. .Is it trying to show the Dogs DONT get a dream run?

They probably complained to the AFL.

Rd 1 vs Collingwood + 4

Rd 2 vs WCE in Melbourne -5

Rd 3 vs Kangaroos + 9

Rd 4 vs Brisbane + 14

Rd 5 vs Suns + 1

Rd 6 vs GWS + 1

Rd 7 vs Richmond - 4

Rd 8 vs Carlton + 3

Rd 9 vs Port - 2

Rd 10 vs St. Kilda + 10

Rd 11 vs Melbourne + 1

Rd 12 vs Freo  = 0

Rd 13 Bye

Rd 14 vs Geelong + 8

Rd 15 vs WCE + 7

Rd 16 vs Kangaroos + 7

Rd 17 vs Sydney + 13

Rd 18 vs Suns - 1

Rd 19 vs Melbourne + 14

Rd 20 vs Adelaide = 0

Rd 21 vs Essendon  + 3

  On 12/08/2021 at 08:13, Little Goffy said:

While we're in the hunt for free kick data, I'd be fascinated to see a timeline of them over the course of games.

I'm absolutely sure that much of the differential in our game against West Coast game in a couple of bursts, most notably the alarming one right after the restart.

Would be interesting to see the extent of a relationship between free kick 'momentum' and overall game momentum. Before? After? Side by side?

The location too, free kicks inside the oppo forward 50 are the killers.

 
  On 12/08/2021 at 08:41, Demonland said:

It was the free kick differential after Round 2 which was the first round of the season that Zero Hanger release their Free Kick Differential graphic.

I'm not sure why it disappeared but here it is again.

166542405_1867660023408217_2670941786786

Pretty sure the graphic I saw had doggies at +86.

Too much red wine?


  On 12/08/2021 at 04:40, jnrmac said:

Is there a statistics page of frees?

ie A breakdown of what the frees were for?

That would be the frst step in analysing it...

Yep, agree. I'm sure this data exists, but I've never seen it made available publicly.

Separate to any discussion about bias/the Bulldogs, I'd be keen to know what sorts of errors we are making more often than other clubs. 

  On 12/08/2021 at 07:49, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

I think the fallacy in the reasoning above about the Bulldogs is apparent when the number of possessions is taken into account.

The Bulldogs often have a large differential greatly in their favour, even when the opposition has more possessions.So the man with the ball in the opposition is being penalised. They must be far better tacklers than any other side.

That's my point: they may well be, and if they are, it stands to reason they'd get more free kicks.

Tackling properly is a skill, like kicking and marking. It isn't silly at all to suggest one side might do it better than another, and that should be borne out in a higher free kick count.

Tonight's game is a great example of what I was saying above.

Richmond are -4 in free kicks tonight. They've given away a stack of off the ball, or late hit, or undisciplined, free kicks tonight.

It's not a conspiracy or anti-Richmond bias, it's just a side which infringes on the rules a lot.

  • 2 weeks later...

So four teams in the 8 are very positive (+146) and four are somewhat negative (-45).

Two teams in the top 4 are positive (+45) and two are negative (-22).

Significance?


I ran this through the old stats calculator. Mean -0.11, standard deviation 31.7. All numbers comfortably within 3 standard deviations. Chance of 72 or more: 1%. Change of -86 or lower: 1%. So outliers, but (unfortunately) nothing extraordinary.

I also ran it through the old conspiracy calculator and it ranked the Dogs as "teachers pets". So again no raised eyebrows.

I also ran it through the old mongrel calculator and it confirmed that Richmond are in fact mongrels. So that makes it official.

Edited by Mazer Rackham

  On 24/08/2021 at 08:27, Demonstone said:

It's less than one kick per game.  Nothing to get upset about, folks.

Agreed, and how many individual acts influence a game of footy?

Kicks,  handballs,  marks,  contested marks (forward line?) punching clear,  spoils,  spoils to create a boundary throw in,  tap outs,  tap outs to advantage,  positioning of the onballers at stoppages & centre bounce downs,  tagging,  knock-ons,  individuals running to flood,  formation needs,  bumps,  running to create midfield stoppages,  running to press forward,  2-way running,  double teaming,  blocking,  pressure acts,  1%ers,  shepherding,  shots at goal etc etc etc

However, actual talent levels are needed with all those examples.  Fitness, selfless acts and teamwork are huge factors as well

So the footy acts number in the thousands.  That's where games of footy are won & lost

And without a great degree of talent along with top level coaching, a team can't hope to win big anyway

Edited by Macca


  On 12/08/2021 at 08:13, Little Goffy said:

While we're in the hunt for free kick data, I'd be fascinated to see a timeline of them over the course of games.

I'm absolutely sure that much of the differential in our game against West Coast game in a couple of bursts, most notably the alarming one right after the restart.

Would be interesting to see the extent of a relationship between free kick 'momentum' and overall game momentum. Before? After? Side by side?

Clearly demonstrated in the cats second qrt onslaught imho.

Ya, how many are “let go”

Selwoods throws and insufficient intent

Dangerfield’s 25 m runs

Hawkins “dump” tackles - two weeks in a row

 

 

Last 10 finals Dogs have won the free kick count. Just sayin....

  On 12/08/2021 at 10:31, Boots and all said:

The location too, free kicks inside the oppo forward 50 are the killers.

Will be interesting to watch these passages of play once the ProVision is online:

 

D3C77A6E-615E-4A8E-A8E4-C668B36B40E2.thumb.jpeg.db6f9613acbfaf4e2d776f6a723e9742.jpeg

Dogs back to dominating the free kick count, 22 to 14 today. 
 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • REPORT: Hawthorn

    There was a time during the current Melbourne cycle that goes back to before the premiership when the club was the toughest to beat in the fourth quarter. The Demons were not only hard to beat at any time but it was virtually impossible to get the better them when scores were close at three quarter time. It was only three or four years ago but they were fit, strong and resilient in body and mind. Sadly, those days are over. This has been the case since the club fell off its pedestal about 12 months ago after it beat Geelong and then lost to Carlton. In both instances, Melbourne put together strong, stirring final quarters, one that resulted in victory, the other, in defeat. Since then, the drop off has been dramatic to the point where it can neither pull off victory in close matches, nor can it even go down in defeat  gallantly.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • CASEY: Footscray

    At twenty-four minutes into the third term of the game between the Casey Demons and Footscray VFL at Whitten Oval, the visitors were coasting. They were winning all over the ground, had the ascendancy in the ruck battles and held a 26 point lead on a day perfect for football. What could go wrong? Everything. The Bulldogs moved into overdrive in the last five minutes of the term and booted three straight goals to reduce the margin to a highly retrievable eight points at the last break. Bouyed by that effort, their confidence was on a high level during the interval and they ran all over the despondent Demons and kicked another five goals to lead by a comfortable margin of four goals deep into the final term before Paddy Cross kicked a couple of too late goals for a despondent Casey. A testament to their lack of pressure in the latter stages of the game was the fact that Footscray’s last ten scoring shots were nine goals and one rushed behind. Things might have been different for the Demons who went into the game after last week’s bye with 12 AFL listed players. Blake Howes was held over for the AFL game but two others, Jack Billings and Taj Woewodin (not officially listed as injured) were also missing and they could have been handy at the end. Another mystery of the current VFL system.

      • Thanks
    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Brisbane

    The Demons head back out on the road in Round 10 when they travel to Queensland to take on the reigning Premiers and the top of the table Lions who look very formidable. Can the Dees cause a massive upset? Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 83 replies
    Demonland
  • PODCAST: Hawthorn

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Demons loss to the Hawks. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 34 replies
    Demonland
  • POSTGAME: Hawthorn

    Wayward kicking for goal, dump kicks inside 50 and some baffling umpiring all contributed to the Dees not getting out to an an early lead that may have impacted the result. At the end of the day the Demons were just not good enough and let the Hawks run away with their first win against the Demons in 7 years.

      • Clap
      • Love
      • Like
    • 332 replies
    Demonland
  • VOTES: Hawthorn

    After 3 fantastic week Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award from Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Kade Chandler and Ed Langdon who round out the Top Five. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Thanks
    • 32 replies
    Demonland